On Aug 30, 2010, at 2:08 PM, Jeff Singleton wrote:
And I submit that using a phrase such as "consistent support for older machines and not violating /usr/X11" is lazy and resource wasting rubbish. If XQuartz already has at least some of the dependencies required ... it is a waste to have to build them anyway, instead of having Macports at least look for and honor dependencies that already exist and provide the necessary pieces. If you took offense to my use of the work "lazy" ... then it is of my humble opinion that you are OK with status quo ... thus you are lazy. Leaving things the way they are in order to support older hardware just isn't justifiable anymore. As far as what I do and what I don't do .... well ... I'm a power-user. So I do what I can and leave the other stuff alone. I never stated I could fix it .. I just stated I believe it needs to be fixed. As far as I thought ... a mailing list is the right place to discuss these things. If you would rather not discuss...then don't reply....its that easy.
But you misunderstand me. I do want to discuss, that's why I am spending the time with you.
I think you are mistaken to use the term lazy here and I'm trying to point that out to you. I think it's inaccurate.
If you spend a short amount of time learning the makeup of a Portfile you shouldn't have to much difficulty modifying the install behaviors of ports and if you have questions people here will help.
Good luck. Regards, Bradley Giesbrecht _______________________________________________ macports-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
